Moreover, source 1 also explains that there may be a ‘future struggle’, therefore implying that there maybe a form of rebellion that could occur in response to the act being implemented. As a result, the source also admits that there could be the likelihood of conflict occurring from the changes brought about by the act, with the lower class possibly becoming unhappy and losing respect for the Source 3 further corroborates with source 1 as the act could ‘root up the feelings of respect, reverence and loyalty, which are the only sure foundations of government.’ Peel therefore suggests that there could be drastic change to the character of the constitution, where the traditional political hierarchy could be destabilised and in effect, agrees with source 1 as they support the view that the act could lead to increased factions and disputes. Taken at face value Sources 1 and 2 clearly conflict with Peel’s claims in Source 3. Both emphasise the limited nature of the proposed reforms and emphasise that the intention is to strengthen the existing system by getting rid of ‘blemishes’ and adding new voters of the most respectable and reliable kind. Palmerston asserts that the changes
Increase taxes over the wealthiest and reduced the taxes over the less wealthy individuals trying to get a more progressive model. These measures would affect in the short-run the aggregate demand for good and services, stimulating consumer spending, earnings and profit rise. This effect will depend on the multiplier effect and the crowding-out 3. What economic policies should the US Federal Government pursue over the next decade? We would consider the following fiscal policies: * Reduction of defense expenditure.
We should take advantage of benefits resulting from the filibuster and weaken the obstruction caused by the minority party. Still, we need the voice from the minority party in the Senate, however, we have to establish an expedited process for the proposal that might be blocked by a few members in the Senate. This would reduce the bad influence caused by filibustering. Thus, there should be a filibuster reform that can weaken the bad effects of filibustering process. The main benefit of the filibuster is that it can provide a useful check on the majority party by extending the debate and force them to find the common ground with some on the other side.
This can slow down the political process immensely, and as the government has a mandate to put through such legislation, pressure groups become undemocratic and start to undermine the democratic process. One last reason why pressure groups undermine democracy is the fact that they themselves may be undemocratic, and the leaders of these groups may not truly represent the views of their leaders. This undermines the whole point of pressure groups groups and thus can be seen as the 'politics of self-interest' and can present the public with overbiased and false information. Overall however, pressure groups are more likely to help the democratic process rather than hinder it, as they advance and improve political participation, and as participation is a vital part of democracy, pressure groups are an important part of the UK's democracy. While pressure groups may have unbalanced influence due to varying methods and funds, they are generally good at being a channel of representation between the people and the government, keeping the government in touch with the people.
Fear for ones safety, for ones loved ones and for ones nation can make any individual act. With this, it is no surprise that politicians use fear as a political strategy for their own purposes. Barrack Obama once stated “We have been operating under a politics of fear: fear of terrorists, fear of immigrants, fear of people of different religious beliefs, fears of gays that they might get married and that somehow that would affect us," (“Begley”). Fear has been used in politics to manipulate the people’s views and ideas. The government is meant to protect its citizens, so naturally if that government were to scare citizens and offer a solution to that fear, they would be more likely to supports its efforts.
This not only gains a new tool to use but also gains you more strings pull and ways to do so. Like the revolutionaries of the past who fed the British after the Battle of Saratoga , the ploy is to make the opponents not to want to fight you, but see how you work in a way they do not want to battle any
Running on Empty In his book, Running on Empty, Peterson recognizes that the hope for modifying the political incentives normally hinges on the changing and the selfish attitudes of voters who have self-interest on political process, hence engendering in vitriolic partnership (Peterson pg. 218). His proposal for the reformation of the budget processes, on the other hand, seems to be myopic, since the pork-barrel politics are disgraceful despite the fact that the reform for the budget processes was proved to be impossible. Peterson has placed a great weight concerning the present generation that is supposed by various obligations to posterity; he says that he is worried whether the social promises of today are binding on the future generation, and if it would be possible to
How one interprets this information and correlates it into their personal beliefs and actions can be overwhelming. This can lead to strong convictions that politics in general are disintegrated and are irrelevant. Apathy towards the government and politics becomes more of a norm for some people, so why bother to vote at all? What is the incentive and why should it matter? I would address these issues with someone who has these dispositions in a number of ways.
Even though it might seems as a small problem, comparing to all other troubles that the nation has experienced, nonetheless it must be addressed in a timely matter because any delay in making the decision will make the issue even more severe. It might cause people’s choice of government to become much skewed. If some area has a majority of supporters for a certain party and the conditions for them to vote are beneficial, the community will be able to include all their votes, and comparing to a place that has supporters of the opposite party but has no opportunity to vote. The candidate for the election will lose that majority of votes and people will be faced with the government that only minority wanted to see in
Referendums have become more widely used since 1997 and have helped to decide controversial policies. The advantages of referendums are large; however there are also a number of disadvantages. Referendums can be used in many ways. For example when the government is split on an issue a referendum can resolve that issue without destroying government itself. This means that referendums therefore can prevent disputes in government and secure a consensus decision so wider use of them would ensure that the number of disputes is reduced even further.